Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

from the are-they-serious? dept

Yesterday, at the Innovation Policy Summit at CES, I attended the panel about SOPA/PIPA. The who, what, where and when is mostly covered via that link, but I wanted to focus on the comments of the one SOPA/PIPA supporter on the panel: Sandra Aistars, from the Copyright Alliance. I have to admit that I was pretty surprised by some of her statements, mainly because she didn't actually seem to understand what was being debated at different points in the conversation, and any time people asked an even remotely nuanced question, she fell back on broad talking points.

Ironically, her favorite talking point, which she repeated every time she was challenged on just about anything, was to accuse everyone else of empty rhetoric and hyperbole about the bill. Except... everyone else on the panel was talking specifics, backed up by fact, while her claims didn't even pass the laugh test and seemed like pure rhetoric. She kept insisting that Lamar Smith's "manager's amendment" had fixed all the problems (which is funny, since it sounds like we're about to get a "manager's amendment" to the manager's amendment).

There were two specific claims that needed to be addressed, though, because they're totally divorced from reality (which is all too common from SOPA/PIPA supporters). The first was in response to a question from Andrew Bridges about specifically which sites Sandra thinks SOPA/PIPA need to be gone after. After all, we keep hearing that the bill is needed to go after "foreign" rogue websites that can't be gotten at by today's law. But, as we've noted, sites like The Pirate Bay, Rapidshare and Megaupload all use .coms or .orgs... which are exempt from SOPA/PIPA. Furthermore, Bridges pointed out that US companies have already filed lawsuits against Rapidshare, Megaupload, Kazaa and many other "foreign" players... and have brought many of them to US courts (in fact, Rapidshare was declared legal, which throws a wrench in the whole "rogue sites" thing).

Amazingly, Aistars insisted that those were exactly the sites they were targeting! Yes, the same sites that can and are being sued under existing US law and which are immune from SOPA/PIPA. It makes you wonder if she even knows what's in the bill, or how the bill defines "foreign" sites.

The second stunning claim was in response to a series of quite reasonable questions about why backers of the bill feel the need to conflate things like counterfeit drugs with music downloads, despite them being totally different. Multiple people asked why not craft specific bills to deal with each thing. The usual response to this kind of question is to claim that they're "both the same kind of violation," which is not accurate at all (as we'll explain in a moment). But Aistars took that to the next level, claiming that it was the same sites who were doing both things. To which all we can say is: which sites are involved in both selling fake pills and offering music/movie downloads? Someone on Twitter suggested that I had obviously missed "thepirateviagrabay." So, there's that.

But, really, as pretty much everyone else in the room seemed to understand, the two situations are extremely different. Trademark/counterfeiting laws are about consumer protection against people being fooled by "fake" products with real brands on them. They involve sites that are selling physical goods in exchange for money, where actual product needs to be shipped. Cyberlockers, torrent trackers, search engines and the like -- whether you agree with what they do or not -- have nothing to do with any of that. All of them provide a service for people to upload/download content (some infringing, some not). They're not "selling" the infringing works and they're not "tricking" people into believing a fake product is a real one. The circumstances are entirely different.

Of course, as someone else on the panel noted, we all know that the trademark holders (some of whom support SOPA/PIPA) are not driving the legislation. It's totally being driven by the MPAA/RIAA. The only real reason to lump the two very different things together is so that supporters of efforts to crack down on services that enable some infringement can pretend that there's real "harm." You see it all the time (and Aistars did this as well). Any time people bring up harm, you talk about fake drugs or counterfeit products. But any time people talk about the size of the "problem" they focus on how much traffic goes to cyberlockers. The two things are very different, but by conflating them, they can pretend the problem is both "dangerous to consumers" and "big." But the only way to do that is to ignore the fact that the part that's dangerous to consumers is actually a very small issue, and the part that's big isn't clearly harmful to consumers.

Reader Comments

Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

I had heard a rumour the Muppets were back and it appears it's true.The Muppets are a wonderful creation but at the end of the day they are voiced by others and we spend an awful lot of time in laughter at their antics. However the irony is the real Muppets are out doing something to stimulate their careers.

Re: Re: Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

Although Jim Henson was definitely the driving force behind the original muppets, they didn't die with him. In fact, one of my high school classmates has been instrumental in keeping the muppets alive since Henson's untimely death.

Just to stay on topic even a little, I'm willing to bet that even Kermit sees that SOPA is dangerous nonsense. After all, he's a pretty down-to-earth frog, and probably smarter than most of the folks writing laws these days.

LOL

Re: LOL

That would of really been funny.
Wikileaks or one of those hacker groups needs to make public all the real dirt on SOPA/PIPA.And it would also be great to make public the finances of all these SOPA/PIPA Supporters so we can all see the money trail and the exact numerical amounts each one receives.

Sure, anonymous and others could delve a little deeper into the dirt and maybe even make a pretty graphic for the lulz, but most of the data you seek is public and, better yet, others have done most of the aggregating for you.

Re: Re: LOL

Darryl...we have had counter-arguments for years! And what are you talking about, with "normal people would respond with a strong counter-argument". That's not what YOU do. You have never once responded with a credible C-A.
And you have already, dozens of times, been totally and correctly disregarded as a dullard moron.

Re: Re: LOL

Re: LOL

My question is, why no one is ever able to precisely argument against those claims on those panels... Mike, can't you send some of your arguments to people on the panels? Some of the examples? I don't know... HELP THEM!

Re:

Driving a wedge inbetween these two is one of the most important tasks of the Pirate Party.

Politicians may not understand technology to the level always required, but they DO understand that counterfeit medicine and teenagers sharing pop music are two completely different phenomena, and that they shouldn't be subject to the same regulation.

Re: Re: Re:

Like with anything else, they only understand it once it's pointed out.

Politicians are subject to the same kind of information firehose as everybody else, but they have the capacity to understand this part immediately without going through technical training on the concepts of a control-less internetworking protocol.

Re: Tebow Tebow Tebow

Bimbo

You can only wonder why they don't send in their most educated and informed people who can win a debate. Even if this was not a debate you can win you can still make a lot of smoke and noise so no one spots your loss.

Instead if we were all on an aircraft then would you want this woman to be your pilot? "Lets bundle to people and animals in together and what do these buttons do again?"

This does not inspire faith. All the resources of the MPAA and RIAA and they send us a woman who puts the blonde in bimbo.

I think Mike Masnick got himself a crush. All the people and discussion in this debate and he focuses only on her. LOL

Re: Bimbo - crush

She's not bad looking, so that's possible, but she doesn't know much about it. ArsTech posted something earlier about it and everyone else on the panel had some idea of what they were talking about, except her.

Even the musician on the panel was against her, and that's someone She's supposed to be protecting!

Re: Re: Bimbo - crush

The problem is her background. She's a paid lobbyist for the studios, not really an artist herself. Given how she worked as Vice President and Associate General Counsel at
Time Warner, I doubt she'd know much about what artists need to survive. And the fact that artists speak up against her is very telling. She needs new ideas because the current ones just aren't working.

Re: Re: Bimbo - crush

The problem is her background. She's a paid lobbyist for the studios, not really an artist herself. Given how she worked as Vice President and Associate General Counsel at
Time Warner, I doubt she'd know much about what artists need to survive. And the fact that artists speak up against her is very telling. She needs new ideas because the current ones just aren't working.

Re: Re:

Not to mention all those years of breathing alone in the dark, breathing in our neighborhoods and around our children. We must stop murders, please call you congressman and tell them to outlaw breathing.

Re:

oh, That show?

heard it on the drive in to work. I think that all of the other guests were probably Itching to dig into her talking points script, but the DR show is not really a debate and did not give a large enough block of time (if there is such a thing) to this discussion. Sandra never seemed to get past the "Stealing is wrong. Disagreeing with stricter insane IP laws means you are a Stealer that Steals Things"

Re: Re:

And ofcourse Masnick and co, all wanted to prove that "Stealing is right" !!!!.

Here is some news for you !!!!!

STEALING IS WRONG and she is right, all other points are NON-points if you disregard that basic fact.

It would be like going to church and trying to argue with the preist that "God does not exist", and hoping to enter into a debate about it when every one else allready "gets it" and if someone goes to church or to a meeting like this with the argument that "stealing is right", or God does not exist, then you should be giving zero time as it is not the correct forumn to debate that issue.

If you are pulled over for speeding in your car, do you argue with the police office that the speed you were going was "safe" and therefore legal ? Masnick would.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Well...Mike could, if he truly wanted to. He has the I.P. address logs of everyone who visits his site. Since your snowflake hasn't changed, more than likely you're using a static address, or haven't bothered resetting your modem. Give him a little while and he could figure out exactly where you live.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

so, if most people are suffering from mass delusion, ie. god exists or infringement is theft, then everyone else should just fall inline like good lemmings and head on off the cliff? I think I finally get it, SOPA/PIPA is a matter of blind faith. I feel so much better knowing I will get into heaven by believing my betters when they tell me how things are and I swallow it whole without understanding the nuances.

Re: Re: Re:

You can also find her work here, where she talks about the "copyright holders" instead of the artists.

The talking points have been found out and they won't work for this issue. No rogue website has harmed an artist that utilized the technology properly. And still, the MAFIAA make money. What exactly does PIPA/SOPA intend if the artists are making money?

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Wow.
Her contribution is just.. amazing.

A repetitive and continued yammering, sounding like she is reading a script from a sheet of paper at times and poo=pooing anyone who protests as being unhelpful and not interested in "constructive dialog".

Painting incredibly broadly, doing her best to tie together fake drugs and infringing Mp3s while claiming to have incredible support.. Support from such tech luminaries as The Better Business Bureau (a well-paid big business lobbying organ in too many respects) and "various fraternal orders of police"

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Damn I can't find a direct contact to her to thank her and her bunch for supporting a bill that will likely make me shut the doors on my distribution for my software so down down will go at least one business.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

24:10 There were some arguments raised in regards to the original version of SOPA that largely went to the issue of DNS redirecting. The manager's amendment that was introduced by Chairman Smith really takes that off the table entirely

So she doesn't seem aware of what sites are/aren't being targeted by this bill. She doesn't seem aware of what mechanisms are/aren't being used to target those sites that may or may not be targeted. What exactly, does this person understand about this bill?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Copying is not stealing - its been said and done, thousands of times, and to you dozens of times no less, so let's move on.

Arguing with a priest that "God does not exist". That's funny, I did exactly that back when I was in school - got into some very good debates with my religion teacher. Even though I'm an atheist, it turned out that, apart from the priest, I was the only person in the class who had bothered to actually read the Bible.
And talk about conflating issues, which is what Mike has been talking about ALL THE TIME. You're conflating copyright infringement with speeding?

Re: Re: Re:

"It would be like going to church and trying to argue with the preist that "God does not exist", and hoping to enter into a debate about it when every one else allready "gets it" and if someone goes to church or to a meeting like this with the argument that "stealing is right", or God does not exist, then you should be giving zero time as it is not the correct forumn to debate that issue."

The Pope doesn't believe in God. Why do you think he hides behind bullet proof glass?

"If you are pulled over for speeding in your car, do you argue with the police office that the speed you were going was "safe" and therefore legal ? Masnick would."

On the 427 in Ontario one night, I was pulled over doing my average cruising speed of 90 MPH ((@145 KMH) on radar) on the ramp leading to the Gardiner. The officer did not ticket me, because on ramps, (notice the sign is a different colour from posted speed limits of 100 KMH (@63 MPH)) it is a RECOMMENDED speed. So yes, depending on circumstances, I would make a Masnickificent argument.

Get yourself some backbone. Stand up straight and quit dragging your knuckles on the ground.

Re:

It was a really weak interview, and the other guests never called her out on the nonsense she was talking.

in that case, the other guests also do not believe Masnicks bullshit. and therefore clearly it is a non-issue, I am sure you have seen many NPR interviews (I have) and they always put competent people of representative groups for a strong counter argument.

They did not call Masnick ofcourse !!!!

It is also very hard to justify breaking the law, regardless of the law. As masnick proposes.

Some people represent the needy, Masnick thinks he is going good work by representing the greedy.

As a result Masnick has gained the authority and respect that you would give to someone you consider a thief, and a supporter of theft.

Re: Re:

Yawn...oh wait, darryl, is that you?
*Double checks*
Yep, completely inane comment that completely ignores reality and completely ignores what was written in the article, in a vain attempt to make some sort of potshot against Mike.
I'm just gonna go back to sleep. My dreams will be filled of games and movies I'm gonna pirate: maybe some of the games will end up in my bought and paid for Steam library that currently contains over 60+ games.

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Wow...talk about a truly pointless comment. Does the fact that I didn't go back to sleep offend you in some way? And darryl...I know its your comment because the symbol next to your name didn't change.

Re: Re:

They're not "selling" the infringing works and they're not "tricking" people into believing a fake product is a real one. The circumstances are entirely different.

A number of the infringing sites are indeed tricking people into thinking they're legitimate sources. Visa, PayPal, Amex are listed a payment processors, mainstream ads and all located courtesy of Google in response to a query about where to find a specific movie.

Re:

I'm what you'd call a hard-core pirate (just ignore completely that I also buy, yes pay for, a huge amount of media as well) and on the sites that I frequent...none, I repeat, NONE, of them try to trick you into thinking they're legit.
At most, there's Paypal buttons to DONATE to keep the site up, but that's entirely different to selling the works.
Plus, comments about the evilness of Google ads have been trashed here so many times I won't bother repeating.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

So...darryl (why change to Anonymous Coward?)...you still haven't answered my question.
If a Star Trek-style replicator were to be invented, why should people obey a law that says "You can't replicate this or that?"
Keep in mind we already have a similar device - a computer that can process (replicate) any type of sound/image. But, we live in a world where we're told NOT to. We're told to pretend that an infinite resource is actually scarce.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

When "content" companies call everything a loss In order to avoid paying anyone, keep the money for themselves and constantly commit acts of cultural theft each and every day, I don't think the thieves are us.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

I understand the importance of trying to do "the right thing", and if it makes you feel better to recite that as you bend over and expose your backside to the wealthy and entitled who are pulling the strings (to the detriment of the the rest of us "losers"), more power to ya'.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

haha,,, you link to a DT article about 3D printing, guess what I have a 2D printing "replicator" right here, and do you know how it works ??

I have to give it paper and ink and power and detailed instructions, and it 'replicates' a document !!!! amazing.

Now imagine I had a 3D replicator, and I wanted to create a 3D object, I again would have to feed in the equivalent to paper (metals, plasics, wook, material, leather, rubber.

I would probably have to do what I have to do with my 2D replicator I allready own, it cannot create ink or paper, So I will have to 'pre-manufacurue' the basic components of what I entend to replicate.

SO for a car I would probably have to feed in sheet metal, an engine, or the components of the car.

A 3D printer of the type under development, creates items from a laser hardened resin, so if you want to purchase a ton of that resin and think you can make a car that works with parts make from a plastic then go for it.

It would probably end up much more expensive to buy the weight of resin than it would be to buy a car.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

I have to give it paper and ink and power and detailed instructions, and it 'replicates' a document !!!! amazing.

Now, just remove the paper and ink and you have a digital replicator, amazing! Just like the 2D replicator, except you don't have the onus of providing raw materials beyond the container. All you have to do now is go find something cool to replicate, like some music, and you have an analogue compression wave replicator. It's like magic!

Note that no where in what I said was infringement (theft, in your parlance) involved. Your computer, no matter how much you want it to otherwise, copies any and all things you perceive from its outputs several times in order to translate them to a format that you can readily understand. The "theft" you so abhor, is in many cases innocent and accidental. In fact, the simple act of storing such copies ought to be encouraged as it spreads the culture and knowledge stored in a more substantial manner. That such behavior, even if maliciously intended, is considered a crime should make you shudder, especially as you parrot the words of others without paying for a license.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Why do I imagine this kind of idiotic rant being made by you 20 years ago, about how hard drives were too big and expensive to ever be portable? About how, since most people were on dial-up, you shouldn't even consider the possibility of digital distribution?

I remember fools trying to make this argument in the late 90s. How did that work out?

"It would probably end up much more expensive to buy the weight of resin than it would be to buy a car."

...and when the cost comes down low enough for the average consumer to afford? What then? Whine to your lawyer and politician buddies about people "stealing"?

Re: Re: Re:

Take the time to think would would occur if you could download a car.

The cost to create would fall to almost zero. Open source communities sharing car designs would spring up and propel automotive innovation to unimagined magnitudes - all by sharing information. How could this possibly be a bad thing?
Did anyone watch the replicators on Star Trek and think they were terrible inventions because they were stifling innovation?

Stop Random Stabbings and Get Me A Fucking Sandwich Act. (Or "StRaStAGeMAFuSA" Act... we're still working on the name). It's a new Bill that aims to protect people on the street from being randomly stabbed (presumably, by some hooligans). It also has a provision that ensures that I get a fucking sandwich.

We all know how necessary this is for the safety of the citizens. We all know that stabbings are bad, they're as bad as sandwiches are delicious. That's why these two things need to be addressed as one.

Please vote YES on the StRaS..sammich Act, so that we can fight the onslaught of violent crime on the street via stabbing and lack of sandwiches, so that I may have a sandwich in my belly, instead of a bloody knife sticking out of it. Why would you want people to get randomly stabbed? Get me a fucking sandwich!

Something something something "I dont have any arguments about SOPA so I will use everyone elses".

DO you ever actually originate an article or stance ??? Masnick ??? or do you just keep googling until you find some comment that you can ride on ?

It seems all your opinions are the opinions of others, and all you can hope to do is parrot their statements.

Do you not have any cogent arguments of your own to present ? guess not... you do not have to read many of your 'articles' to notice this pattern. Is it because you have no balls masnick ? or just because you have no knowledge and are unable to develop your own valid arguments ?

Or is it because this way you have some denial of the facts ? (it was not me who said that lie, it was someone else, I just quoted it and perpetuated it !!!)

I know that came off as me simply copying your derisive litany, but if you take some time and reflect, you may just realize that there's a hidden gem of innovation in the message. Also, I like your attempt to co-opt the fantastic star wars humor of Family Guy. Unfortunately, the sith emperor formula does not seem to cover all cases. Perhaps you could have gone with a flattering imitation of the giant robot camels, or even Consuela the maid.

Re: Its the hourly Masnick SOPA Opera

So, d-null, what's your percentage in this? According to you and other of your ilk our percentage is that we won't be able to 'steal' anymore, even though what you are really accusing us of is properly called 'infringement.' So obviously anyone with a voice is gaining something from their point of view. What about you? Getting a fat shilling paycheck, again?

Re: Re: Its the hourly Masnick SOPA Opera

I just do it automatically now. Wall of text headed by the name darryl? Not worth my time to even start reading it, I'll go on to the next person capable of making his point in English, even if it's just another AC troll...

Re: Re:

Movies and music are such an irrelevant amount of America's GNP that we would all be fine if they just dried up and blew away. In fact I believe that eventuality might actually help raise our GNP by taking away a significant Area of loss to the economy; frivolous lawsuits and other such chicanery.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

and what percentage do the freetards contribute ?
Many pirates pay tax ? or even operate in the US ?

Actually a recent research done by this one guy showed that black markets can movement something around $10 trillion dollars globally, they are almost 70% of the whole world and are the ones that stimulate growth, you see when someone doesn't have a monopoly other can enter that market and it evolves naturally, when you try to protect any one player you harm that market.

Re: Re:

Would you actually READ what you write before you post?
"What group is more profitablel for the US, congress or Hollywood ?"

Apart from the atrocious spelling (for god's sake man, web browsers come with spell-checkers, turn them on!)
Congress is a branch of government! It's not a business corporation (even though it acts like one, what with all the bribes and corruption).
There have been past articles on Techdirt showing that the tech industry massively and I do mean massively dwarfs that of Hollywood.

Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

Not nearly as much as the desperation that is displayed on Techdirt in response to SOPA/PIPA.

Clearly Masnick is terrified of SOPA, and is pulling out all stops to fight it, SOPA has Masnick by his balls (if he has them), and he is SO SCARED, he is wetting his little panties constantly and cant stop from crying !!!

SOPA could use this web site as a classic example of the level of fear that this bill has instilled on the freetards.

Look at Masnicks respose and reactions to it !!!!!! He is terrified !!!!!

He is doing ALL IN HIS POWER to stop it, and slowly working out that he actually HAS NO POWER to start with. Therefore the abject terror displayed.

Forget about connecting with fans and reasons to buy, that is secondary and reliant on being able to steal, and SOPA is not letting Mikie get his way... so he is throwing a little (big) tantrum....

It's fun to watch though, watching Masnick fall all over himself trying to justify his stance.

And watching week after week the level of fear increase with his every failure.

Re: Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

I think you mean quantity but again, certainly not quality. I don't see where SOPA/PIPA would have any effect on Techdirt, except maybe give his SOPA stand more legs when things start turning up missing from searches.

Re: Re: Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

It's actually turned into some sort of pattern now. Average_joe was clearly drunk when he last showed up, and now darryl is too. Just shows the quality of argument we can expect from the other side i.e., no quality.

Re: Re: Re: Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

Having been very pro-copyright about ten years ago, I can at least understand most of AJ's arguments (even if I no longer agree with most of them), and on subject outside of IP he seems to be at least willing to engage in honest discussion (at least at times).

Re: Desperation Of SOPA/PIPA Supporters On Display At CES

We should all be terrified of SOPA. One accusation (not conviction) from someone slimy like you darryl and under SOPA, Techdirt would disappear. Oh shit, I just gave you an idea. Quick! Go back to what it is you usually do! Plug your fingers in your ears and go "LALALALA! Can't hear you!"

Here come the clowns

One of the things I like about techdirt is the reasoned, intelligent discussion about the issues that have been raised. But after a while that can get a little heavy to digest, so it's nice to know that the regular trolls, or as I see them clowns, come out of their bridges and amuse us all with their antics! The deliberate misunderstandings and the logical fallacies make me laugh.

So darryl, and all the other AC's that appear to ignore reality, please continue, you amuse me to no end.

Wat?

If the consequences weren't so serious, this would be beyond funny. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the only real driving force behind this bill really have no idea what they are targeting, how they intend to do it, or what the consequences of their actions will be.

The fact that this for lack of a better word "spasm" has gotten this far is a very real indication of how badly our system of government has been compromised.

They can't even discuss the bill that they wrote. I guess once GoDaddy scampered off they lost their technical support.

Re: Re: Wat?

Read back a few articles on the fact that SOPA is all about accusations without conviction. The DMCA is already bad enough, or are you seriously saying that we are guilty of file stealing (and how does one steal a file?) without giving us what has become a luxury of a fair trial?

SOPA and PIPA not just for USA

No matter where you are in the world these laws will destroy legitimate businesses around the globe. America will become the most hatred country and i hope gets sued by every country if these laws are passed.

Re:

sopa

A word to the wise: don't underestimate her. Aistars may now run the Copyright Alliance and serve as a mouthpiece for small copyright holders (particularly when their interests align with big ones), but she is one of the best known IP lawyers in the country, having headed the IP group at Time Warner's legal department, chaired inter-industry tech standards groups, and practiced IP law at a big Wall Street law firm. Those who let their guard down and assume that she, like the pathetic Copyright Alliance of old, only apprehends airy generalities will risk getting torched. We all know that some (but not all)of the antiSOPA hype is strategic smokescreen and it's in our interest to get SOPA supporters totally engaged in those detours. Aistars unfortunately probably understands as well as anyone what's what.

Re: sopa

She's got the talking points from Mitch Glazier. They're slimy individuals paid to sell out the public. The IP laws are a joke and everyone sees them as the charade they really are. If she's as smart as to be intended by her background, then she should be able to speak to the public and stop dodging the questions. But every last copyright supporter continues with the same points. Glazier, Tepp, Aistars, and even O'Leary can't say "it's for the artists" when it's not, nor can they say "this progresses the arts" when taking down a website involves more work than actually making a better alternative.

I mean seriously, when has any of the maximalists that are discussed here brought in a better alternative to Bittorrent?

RE

lets be VERY clear, COPYRIGHT is a total MISNOMER, it's COPYGRANT, not right, never was a right and never will be a right, BECAUSE Rights CANNOT be granted by the Government at all EVER. so before you call me a "thief" ( at which I will SUE your ass for defamation) Be fucking Honest, MY RIGHTS supersede your fucking COPYGRANT ALWAYS

Re: RE

I see. Your "right" to copy and distribute what you wish whenever you wish and wherever you wish is more important than the "right" of a creator to try and generate recompense from the fruit of his/her labor.

I do not know about you, but in my vernacular the word that immediately comes to mind is "selfish".

Re: RE

where did you get that from ? the US "bill of rights" or the US constitution ?

Also the Government does not "grant" copyright anyway !!!

DO you honestly think that Masnick would be able to produce a Government document that grants him the copyright to this web site ?

He would not have such a document, yet he DOES HAVE the copyright for this web site !!! Go figure ????

No, the Government is simply doing what governments do, govern...

That means ensuring the Governments citizens abide by the laws and rules of the land, and respect the rights of others, and to ensure citizens meet their social and moral obligations.

Rights are not a "thing" that can be arbitarily bestowed on someone, copyright included.

Think of it like owning a car, you have a right to own a car, and drive it,, you also have a right to restrict others from driving your car, even if they do have their own right to drive a car, they do not have the right to drive YOUR car, unless you grant them that right.

Now lets say you own a song (you created it yourself), you have a right to keep control and authority about who can or cannot listen to or use your song, just like your car.

Even though the other person has a right to listen to songs, he does not have that right if it is your song and you choose not to give him those rights.

Re: Re: RE

Which is precisely the problem we've been talking about Darryl.
All these efforts are not to protect artists or to protect their incomes.
They're about the "right to keep control and authority". The movie industry freaked out over Netflix, even though its a very profitable company that pays them licensing fees, because Netflix represents a loss of control.
Well sorry Darryl (or D as you want to call yourself now). I don't respect your control. Your so-called right to keep control infringes on my natural right to say and do as I please. I want to sing a song, but according to you, I have to make sure no-body owns it first, which is an impossible task given that there's no central database of copyright. And even then, I wouldn't be sure: I may singing non-copyrighted lyrics, but what about the music itself?

Case in point - the extreme difficulty restaurants and similar venues face when allowing live bands to perform. They're being told to pay crippling licence fees in case someone MIGHT infringe copyright. This ensures that copyright holders have a dictatorial control over who performs music, when and where, even music they don't own the copyrights to.